What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4657690 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $120.44 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4657690?

Compensation: no hot water for one w…: $100.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4657690?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4657690?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9675242-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4657690 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $120.44 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4657690?

Compensation: no hot water for one w…: $100.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4657690?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4657690?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9675242-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4657690 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4657690 — net $120.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: no hot water for one week	$100.00	no hot water for one week
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$120.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$120.44

Order

[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $120.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. This is an unusual application because it involves the gas connection at the start of a tenancy. Usually the power and gas stay connected between tenancies, but in this situation they were disconnected. The tenants paid for the power and gas to be reconnected, and they want that cost reimbursed by the landlord. They also want compensation because they could not live at the tenancy premises for the first two weeks of the tenancy because they had no hot water.
The landlord has also filed an application and wants the tenants to pay for a call out to check the gas when their plumbers found there was no fault. The questions I have to decide are: • Who should pay the reconnection fees? • Should the landlord pay to check if there was a gas leak? • Should the tenants get compensation?

Who should pay the reconnection fees?

Tenants are responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to their occupation of the premises or to their use of the facilities. Therefore, tenants are liable for the electricity, gas, telephone and internet they use, and for water charges based on consumption. They are not liable for fixed water charges, property insurance and rates. See section 39 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Before the tenancy started the landlord told the tenants that there was no power at the house. The tenants arranged for the power and gas to be connected through [software company], a company which arranges service connections for tenants. The day the tenant went to move in they realised they had no power and no hot water. They were able to arrange for the power to be connected that day. The gas could not be connected without a contractor coming to the house, which would have cost extra because of a weekend call out fee.
The tenants did not move their bed or bedding into the house, and they did not stay there until the gas was turned on. On 27 July they asked for the gas to be connected and a contractor went the next day. The contractor found there was a gas leak and advised the tenants to contact the landlord. The landlord and the building manager both sent plumbers to check for a gas leak on 31 August. No leak was found. The gas was finally connected on 1 August, which meant the tenants had hot water. The tenants moved in on 5 August, two weeks later than they should have.
The tenants submitted that the landlord should pay for the reconnection because of section 45(2) RTA, which states that landlords shall not interfere with the supply of gas, electricity or other services to the tenancy premises. In reply, the landlord said neither the owner nor the landlord had arranged for the power and gas to be disconnected. I am not persuaded the owner or the landlord arranged for the power and gas to be disconnected, so section 45(2) RTA does not help the tenants.
Section 39(3) RTA states that tenants are responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises which are exclusively attributable to the tenants’ occupation of the premises. This certainly suggests the tenants should pay the costs of having the power and gas reconnected. Even though the power and gas were disconnected between the tenancies – while the premises were not occupied — the reconnection cost is solely attributable to these tenants’ occupation.
I have also considered other Tribunal orders where reconnection costs were considered. Overwhelmingly orders have been made that tenants pay compensation to landlords where power has been disconnected at the end of a tenancy.
For these reasons I find the tenants should pay the reconnection costs for the power and the gas. This claim is dismissed.

Should the landlord pay to check if there was a gas leak?

No one can explain why, but the plumbers sent by the landlord could not find any fault with the gas. They charged $333.38 for their time. The landlord wants the tenants to pay the invoice under the ‘no fault’ clause in the tenancy agreement. I have been provided with an email from [energy provider] that confirms their contractor found a gas leak and advised the tenants to tell their landlord. The tenants acted appropriately. I find this was a maintenance issue and the landlord should pay for the plumbers to check the tenants were safe. This claim is dismissed.

Should the tenants get compensation?

The tenants submitted they should not have to pay the rent for the first two weeks of the tenancy because they could not move in. They managed to move in most of their belongings, but they did not stay in the house because there was no hot water. They said they extended their stay at paid accommodation, but I have not been given any supporting evidence that they had to pay extra for those two weeks. The landlord submitted that the tenants were slow to ask for the gas to be connected, and the property manager did everything in her power to help get the power and gas connected.
I have approached compensation in a different way from the tenants. I find they could have moved in on 22 July, because they had power. The only service they did not have was hot water. There was a gas leak which prevented the tenants from having hot water for six days from 27 July to 1 August. The tenants are entitled to compensation for the loss of amenity for a week and $100 seems a reasonable amount to me. Other orders
Because the tenants have substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
I allow suppression for both parties because there has been no breach of the RTA and there is no public interest in the parties being named.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4657690 — net $120.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: no hot water for one week	$100.00	no hot water for one week
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$120.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$120.44

Order

[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $120.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. This is an unusual application because it involves the gas connection at the start of a tenancy. Usually the power and gas stay connected between tenancies, but in this situation they were disconnected. The tenants paid for the power and gas to be reconnected, and they want that cost reimbursed by the landlord. They also want compensation because they could not live at the tenancy premises for the first two weeks of the tenancy because they had no hot water.
The landlord has also filed an application and wants the tenants to pay for a call out to check the gas when their plumbers found there was no fault. The questions I have to decide are: • Who should pay the reconnection fees? • Should the landlord pay to check if there was a gas leak? • Should the tenants get compensation?

Who should pay the reconnection fees?

Tenants are responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to their occupation of the premises or to their use of the facilities. Therefore, tenants are liable for the electricity, gas, telephone and internet they use, and for water charges based on consumption. They are not liable for fixed water charges, property insurance and rates. See section 39 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Before the tenancy started the landlord told the tenants that there was no power at the house. The tenants arranged for the power and gas to be connected through [software company], a company which arranges service connections for tenants. The day the tenant went to move in they realised they had no power and no hot water. They were able to arrange for the power to be connected that day. The gas could not be connected without a contractor coming to the house, which would have cost extra because of a weekend call out fee.
The tenants did not move their bed or bedding into the house, and they did not stay there until the gas was turned on. On 27 July they asked for the gas to be connected and a contractor went the next day. The contractor found there was a gas leak and advised the tenants to contact the landlord. The landlord and the building manager both sent plumbers to check for a gas leak on 31 August. No leak was found. The gas was finally connected on 1 August, which meant the tenants had hot water. The tenants moved in on 5 August, two weeks later than they should have.
The tenants submitted that the landlord should pay for the reconnection because of section 45(2) RTA, which states that landlords shall not interfere with the supply of gas, electricity or other services to the tenancy premises. In reply, the landlord said neither the owner nor the landlord had arranged for the power and gas to be disconnected. I am not persuaded the owner or the landlord arranged for the power and gas to be disconnected, so section 45(2) RTA does not help the tenants.
Section 39(3) RTA states that tenants are responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises which are exclusively attributable to the tenants’ occupation of the premises. This certainly suggests the tenants should pay the costs of having the power and gas reconnected. Even though the power and gas were disconnected between the tenancies – while the premises were not occupied — the reconnection cost is solely attributable to these tenants’ occupation.
I have also considered other Tribunal orders where reconnection costs were considered. Overwhelmingly orders have been made that tenants pay compensation to landlords where power has been disconnected at the end of a tenancy.
For these reasons I find the tenants should pay the reconnection costs for the power and the gas. This claim is dismissed.

Should the landlord pay to check if there was a gas leak?

No one can explain why, but the plumbers sent by the landlord could not find any fault with the gas. They charged $333.38 for their time. The landlord wants the tenants to pay the invoice under the ‘no fault’ clause in the tenancy agreement. I have been provided with an email from [energy provider] that confirms their contractor found a gas leak and advised the tenants to tell their landlord. The tenants acted appropriately. I find this was a maintenance issue and the landlord should pay for the plumbers to check the tenants were safe. This claim is dismissed.

Should the tenants get compensation?

The tenants submitted they should not have to pay the rent for the first two weeks of the tenancy because they could not move in. They managed to move in most of their belongings, but they did not stay in the house because there was no hot water. They said they extended their stay at paid accommodation, but I have not been given any supporting evidence that they had to pay extra for those two weeks. The landlord submitted that the tenants were slow to ask for the gas to be connected, and the property manager did everything in her power to help get the power and gas connected.
I have approached compensation in a different way from the tenants. I find they could have moved in on 22 July, because they had power. The only service they did not have was hot water. There was a gas leak which prevented the tenants from having hot water for six days from 27 July to 1 August. The tenants are entitled to compensation for the loss of amenity for a week and $100 seems a reasonable amount to me. Other orders
Because the tenants have substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
I allow suppression for both parties because there has been no breach of the RTA and there is no public interest in the parties being named.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4657690 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4657690 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Who should pay the reconnection fees?

Should the landlord pay to check if there was a gas leak?

Should the tenants get compensation?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Who should pay the reconnection fees?

Should the landlord pay to check if there was a gas leak?

Should the tenants get compensation?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions